Intercomparison of In Situ Sensors for Ground-Based Land Surface Temperature Measurements.

Land surface temperature (LST) is a key variable in the determination of land surface energy exchange processes from local to global scales. Accurate ground measurements of LST are necessary for a number of applications including validation of satellite LST products or improvement of both climate and numerical weather prediction models. With the objective of assessing the quality of in situ measurements of LST and to evaluate the quantitative uncertainties in the ground-based LST measurements, intensive field experiments were conducted at NOAA's Air Resources Laboratory (ARL)'s Atmospheric Turbulence and Diffusion Division (ATDD) in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA, from October 2015 to January 2016. The results of the comparison of LSTs retrieved by three narrow angle broadband infrared temperature sensors (IRT), hemispherical longwave radiation (LWR) measurements by pyrgeometers, forward looking infrared camera with direct LSTs by multiple thermocouples (TC), and near surface air temperature (AT) are presented here. The brightness temperature (BT) measurements by the IRTs agreed well with a bias of <0.23 °C, and root mean square error (RMSE) of <0.36 °C. The daytime LST(TC) and LST(IRT) showed better agreement (bias = 0.26 °C and RMSE = 0.67 °C) than with LST(LWR) (bias > 1.1 and RMSE > 1.46 °C). In contrast, the difference between nighttime LSTs by IRTs, TCs, and LWR were <0.47 °C, whereas nighttime AT explained >81% of the variance in LST(IRT) with a bias of 2.64 °C and RMSE of 3.6 °C. To evaluate the annual and seasonal differences in LST(IRT), LST(LWR) and AT, the analysis was extended to four grassland sites in the USA. For the annual dataset of LST, the bias between LST (IRT) and LST (LWR) was <0.7 °C, except at the semiarid grassland (1.5 °C), whereas the absolute bias between AT and LST at the four sites were <2 °C. The monthly difference between LST (IRT) and LST (LWR) (or AT) reached up to 2 °C (5 °C), whereas half-hourly differences between LSTs and AT were several degrees in magnitude depending on the site characteristics, time of the day and the season.

Correction: Lee, T. R., et al. On the Use of Rotary-Wing Aircraft to Sample Near-Surface Thermodynamic Fields: Results from Recent Field Campaigns. Sensors 2019, 19(1), 10.

The authors wish to make the following correction to this paper [...].

On the Use of Rotary-Wing Aircraft to Sample Near-Surface Thermodynamic Fields: Results from Recent Field Campaigns.

Rotary-wing small unmanned aircraft systems (sUAS) are increasingly being used for sampling thermodynamic and chemical properties of the Earth's atmospheric boundary layer (ABL) because of their ability to measure at high spatial and temporal resolutions. Therefore, they have the potential to be used for long-term quasi-continuous monitoring of the ABL, which is critical for improving ABL parameterizations and improving numerical weather prediction (NWP) models through data assimilation. Before rotary-wing aircraft can be used for these purposes, however, their performance and the sensors used therein must be adequately characterized. In the present study, we describe recent calibration and validation procedures for thermodynamic sensors used on two rotary-wing aircraft: A DJI S-1000 and MD4-1000. These evaluations indicated a high level of confidence in the on-board measurements. We then used these measurements to characterize the spatiotemporal variability of near-surface (up to 300-m AGL) temperature and moisture fields as a component of two recent field campaigns: The Verification of the Origins of Rotation in Tornadoes Experiment in the Southeast U.S. (VORTEX-SE) in Alabama, and the Land Atmosphere Feedback Experiment (LAFE) in northern Oklahoma.

A scaling approach for quantifying the net CO2 flux of the Kuparuk River Basin, Alaska.

Net CO2 flux measurements conducted during the summer and winter of 1994-96 were scaled in space and time to provide estimates of net CO2 exchange during the 1995-96 (9 May 1995-8 May 1996) annual cycle for the Kuparuk River Basin, a 9200 km2 watershed located in NE Alaska. Net CO2 flux was measured using dynamic chambers and eddy covariance in moist-acidic, nonacidic, wet-sedge, and shrub tundra, which comprise 95% of the terrestrial landscape of the Kuparuk Basin. CO2 flux data were used as input to multivariate models that calculated instantaneous and daily rates of gross primary production (GPP) and whole-ecosystem respiration (R) as a function of meteorology and ecosystem development. Net CO2 flux was scaled up to the Kuparuk Basin using a geographical information system (GIS) consisting of a vegetation map, digital terrain map, dynamic temperature and radiation fields, and the models of GPP and R. Basin-wide estimates of net CO2 exchange for the summer growing season (9 May-5 September 1995) indicate that nonacidic tundra was a net sink of -31.7 ± 21.3 GgC (1 Gg = 109 g), while shrub tundra lost 32.5 ± 6.3 GgC to the atmosphere (negative values denote net ecosystem CO2 uptake). Acidic and wet sedge tundra were in balance, and when integrated for the entire Kuparuk River Basin (including aquatic surfaces), whole basin summer net CO2 exchange was estimated to be in balance (-0.9 ± 50.3 GgC). Autumn to winter (6 September 1995-8 May 1996) estimates of net CO2 flux indicate that acidic, nonacidic, and shrub tundra landforms were all large sources of CO2 to the atmosphere (75.5 ± 8.3, 96.4 ± 11.4, and 43.3 ± 4.7 GgC for acidic, nonacidic, and shrub tundra, respectively). CO2 loss from wet sedge surfaces was not substantially different from zero, but the large losses from the other terrestrial landforms resulted in a whole basin net CO2 loss of 217.2 ± 24.1 GgC during the 1995-96 cold season. When integrated for the 1995-96 annual cycle, acidic (66.4 + 25.25 GgC), nonacidic (64.7 ± 29.2 GgC), and shrub tundra (75.8 ± 8.4 GgC) were substantial net sources of CO2 to the atmosphere, while wet sedge tundra was in balance (0.4 + 0.8 GgC). The Kuparuk River Basin as a whole was estimated to be a net CO2 source of 218.1 ± 60.6 GgC over the 1995-96 annual cycle. Compared to direct measurements of regional net CO2 flux obtained from aircraft-based eddy covariance, the scaling procedure provided realistic estimates of CO2 exchange during the summer growing season. Although winter estimates could not be assessed directly using aircraft measurements of net CO2 exchange, the estimates reported here are comparable to measured values reported in the literature. Thus, we have high confidence in the summer estimates of net CO2 exchange and reasonable confidence in the winter net CO2 flux estimates for terrestrial landforms of the Kuparuk river basin. Although there is larger uncertainty in the aquatic estimates, the small surface area of aquatic surfaces in the Kuparuk river basin (≈ 5%) presumably reduces the potential for this uncertainty to result in large errors in basin-wide CO2 flux estimates.